[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Slurs do not work with Larsen articulations

From: foxfanfare
Subject: Re: Slurs do not work with Larsen articulations
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 03:48:52 -0700 (MST)

David Kastrup wrote
> That's actually the killer reason.  There are a few places where
> documentation strings get drawn into the manual, and those documentation
> strings can be used more and less tersely.  They should be verbose
> enough to be useful which may include examples (examples take up a whole
> lot of space so one needs to carefully consider whether they are worth
> the imprint).  However, stuff like grob properties are often "generic"
> and can hold for quite a number of different grobs, partially getting
> interpreted in somewhat different manners.  Specific examples for those
> are likely not covering typical use cases well enough.

I understand. But for instance in the  Available Music Functions
section, sometimes there is a small code exemple, sometime there isn't
(almost evry time). I found personnaly clearer when the functions were
illustrated in their context.

I think it could be great to have at least in this section, a recap of all
the main music functions with a small exemple (like for the \tuplet
command). Or a link which could automatically redirect to a specif snippet
exemple or the right page in the documentation. 

For instance, the \transpose could be directly linked to the manual page:
or include a small demonstration like:

\transpose d e {
  \relative {
    \key d \major
    d'4 fis a d

... just an idea...

Also, I don't know if I missed a section but I had sometimes the feeling to
"discover" some functions in the wrong section! For instance, I was looking
to put some alterations on top of the notes. I looked here:
and here:

I tried the 'direction property which seemed to be what I needed for, but
without any success. I tried then something with the side-axis but no result
either... I used the markup command instead. And then I discovered 'by
coincidence'  here
that it could have been easily done with the command "\set
suggestAccidentals = ##t". This wasn't specified in the  original alteration

Maybe I didn't used the manual properly but for this specific exemple,
alterations are listed in 4 different sections (3.1.1 Accidental / 3.1.2
AccidentalCautionary /3.1.3 AccidentalPlacement / 3.1.4 AccidentalSuggestion
) which could be confusing when you're looking for a specific result. I'm
still struggling to find a way to move the accidentals order within a chord!
I have sometimes the feeling to be stuck in a maze when I'm looking for a
specific output... I don't know if what I tried to say makes sense to you!

David Kastrup wrote
> How does this work for consecutive slurs, like LilyPond's
> { c4( d)( e2) }
> ?
> { (c4 (d) e2) }
> looks rather peculiar, wouldn't you say?

Yes and no! I kind of agree with Robert here. This was also my first
'instinct' when I started to write some music code. I think I know why:
everyting is very symmetrical in Lilypond (...) {...} <<...>> So it seemed
natural for me also to write things like this:

{ ([c d e]) }

... even if your specific exemple David is relevant. It looks a bit like an
exception, like this one at the end of the documentation:
\fixed c' { c\=1( d\=2( e\=1) f\=2) }

All the best.

Sent from:

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]